Jai Gopal Developers Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC21 Mar 2025CWP/8022/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: Section 148 Income Tax Act 1961; NFAC exclusive jurisdiction to issue Section 148 notice; CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022; AY 2020-2021; jurisdiction of issuing authority; Jai Gopal Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak; CWP-8022-2025 (O&M); disposed of in terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu (CWP No. 15745-2024, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (CWP No. 21509-2023, decided 29.07.2024); liberty to revenue to proceed in accordance with the Act, 1961.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of in terms of Jatinder Singh Bhangu's case (supra) (decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh's case (supra) (decided 29.07.2024); all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. ¶¶24

Jai Gopal Developers Private Limited Vs Assistant… — Income Tax | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶24

Issue for consideration

Whether the notice dated 30.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and consequential actions, for AY 2020-2021, was issued by an authority having jurisdiction, given the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 vesting exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices in the NFAC.

¶¶21

Court's answer

The present writ petition is disposed of in terms of the Co-ordinate Bench decisions in Jatinder Singh Bhangu (CWP No. 15745-2024, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (CWP No. 21509-2023, decided 29.07.2024), which the counsel for Union of India did not dispute.

¶¶24

Ratio / Principle

By disposing of the petition in terms of the Co-ordinate Bench decisions, the same relief follows, namely liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure laid down under the Income Tax Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised.

¶¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab and Haryana High Court (Arun Palli and Sudeepti Sharma JJ.; judgment authored by Sudeepti Sharma J.) disposed of a writ petition by Jai Gopal Developers Pvt. Ltd. challenging a notice dated 30.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and consequential actions for AY 2020-2021. The challenge proceeded on the ground that, per the CBDT circular/notification dated 29.03.2022, the NFAC has exclusive power to issue Section 148 notices, so the Issuing Authority lacked jurisdiction. Counsel for Union of India did not dispute that the issue was covered by the Court's Co-ordinate Bench decisions in Jatinder Singh Bhangu (CWP No. 15745-2024, decided 19.07.2024) and Jasjit Singh (CWP No. 21509-2023, decided 29.07.2024). The Court disposed of the petition in terms of those judgments, under which the revenue had been granted liberty to follow the procedure laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised. All pending applications also stood disposed of.

¶1

CWP-8022-2025

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

139 CWP-8022-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-21.03.2025

¶5

Jai Gopal Developers Pvt. Ltd.

¶6

....Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak & ors. ...Respondents

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

¶10

Present: Mr. B.M. Monga, Mr. Rohit Kaura and Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocates for the petitioner.

¶11

Ms. Gauri Neo Rampal, Sr. Standing counsel with Mr V. Vedika Rao, Advocate for the respondent.

¶12

¶13

SUDEEPTI SHARMA, J.

¶14

Challenge in the instant writ petition is to notice dated 30.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “Act 1961”) and consequential actions, for AY 2020-2021.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the issue involved in the present writ petition is covered by the judgment passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the cases of Jatinder Singh Bhangu vs. Union of India and others , passed in CWP No. 15745-2024 and connected matter, decided on 19.07.2024 and Jasjit Singh vs. Union of India and others (CWP No. 21509-2023 and other connected matters), decided on 29.07.2024 .

¶16

Learned counsel appearing for Union of India has also not disputed the same.

¶17

Gaurav Arora 2025.03.25 13:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶18

CWP-8022-2025

¶19

¶20

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole records of the case.

¶21

The petitioner has challenged the notice dated 30.03.2024 issued under Section 148 of the Act, 1961 and consequential actions, for AY 2020-2021 on the ground that the Issuing Authority had no jurisdiction to issue the same, in view of the circular/notification dated 29.03.2022 of the CBDT, wherein, it has been specifically enumerated that the NFAC has exclusive power to issue the notice under Section 148 of the Act, 1961.

¶22

A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Jatinder Singh Bhangu’s

¶23

case (supra) and Jasjit Singh’s case (supra), allowed the writ petitions on the same issue, as raised in the present writ petition, by granting liberty to the revenue to follow the procedure as laid down under the Act, 1961 and proceed accordingly, if so advised.

¶24